Shortage of X300 Components or Just Strong Demand

[shfawaz]

Just wanted to get a consensus of the community on the X300 supply and demand. Seem like pre-configured units are a bit hard to come by-availability comes and goes on a daily basis.

This can only mean that either Lenovo is having such strong demand for the X300 that they can't keep up or there is component shortage specifically tied to the X300 that is keeping supply short?

Also, anyone have any info on that 120HDD version X300 supposedly coming soon?

[erik]

the X300 makes up only about 5% of overall thinkpad sales so it's both low in production and demand.

any mention of the 120GB HDD was completely removed from the X300 HMM so one could infer that availability won't happen for a long time.   the X300 has a good chance of being SSD-only for a while to remain a high-end/niche ultraportable, leaving the upcoming X200 series to be more common.   in my opinion, buying one with a 120GB HDD would be like buying a 997 GT2 without the turbo.   having an SSD helps make up for the 1.2GHz clock speed and isn't a sacrifice i'd make given the choice.

[ryengineer]

I think opting for SSD version only was an insensible decision by lenovo's marketing team, in my opinion X300 is an awesome machine in every aspect but SSDs are still a little bit futuristic for couple of reasons:

1. Price.

2. Limited storage, SSD's speed is great but not everyone prefers speed over small capacity.

After having used friend's Macbook Air for a few days, I can certainly say the 4200rpm HDD in it is not bad at all, comparatively the 5400rpm HDD in lenovo X300 would've been even better w.r.t both speed and storage, I also think the only thing Apple did right here was to offer two versions of Macbook Air with and without SSD, lenovo could've done the same for separate categories of customers; those who prefer speed over storage and vice versa.

X300 is still the greatest thinkpad made to-date though.

[shfawaz]

I think opting for SSD version only was an insensible decision by lenovo's marketing team, in my opinion X300 is an awesome machine in every aspect but SSDs are still a little bit futuristic for couple of reasons:

1. Price.

2. Limited storage, SSD's speed is great but not everyone prefers speed over small capacity.

X300 is still the greatest thinkpad made to-date though.

I agree that Lenovo was a bit shortsighted on the internal storage issue. As both a Macbook Air (MBA) owner and avid user and an X300 owner and user to a lesser extent. I would have never owned the MBA if I had to Pay more than $1k more for a smaller driive that was questionably better.

I've always traded speed for higher capacity, because lets face it, one can always get by with a slower drive. But once you've hit the capacity limit, you either have to start deleting stuff you really don't want or need to, or you upgrade the drive to a larger capacity. With the X300, you are only left with the former option since there isn't an economical or practical alternative drive to upgrade to.

Granted that 80Gb isn't much more than 64Gb, I can live with it. Comparing the 1.8" 4200RPM drive in my MBA to the 60Gb ones found in my X41's scattered around my house, it is a speed demon-and it cost me $1,000 less than its SSD counterpart.

I still believe Lenovo will have to relent, (if it already hasn't and the 120Gb is in the pipeline) and the 120Gb drive is around the bend if the X300 is to eventually maintain any kind of longevity and achieve numbers to sustain production. Yes SSD prices are ridiculously too expensive and it puts the X300 out of reach for even some of the elite Thinkpad buyers, something I find a bit puzzling coming from Lenovo.

[erik]

i doubt the SSD is hurting X300 sales.   in fact, i doubt its sales are hurting at all given the small market and low production numbers.   the X300 is a niche product much like the macbook air.   it's expensive and doesn't fit everyone's needs, just like an exotic sportscar.   if you need a minivan then don't buy a corvette since it's twice as expensive and fits 1/4 the amount of passengers.   simple.

with that said, had the X300 been designed to use standard 2.5" SATA HDDs then i probably would have skipped the SSD.   by being "forced" into buying an SSD, my eyes were opened up to a new technology that i might not have experience for a few more years.   i have no regrets with the SSD.   it's fast, it's silent, and it runs cool.   it has made my overall X300 experience the best thinkpad experience i've had in 13+ years.

for my use 64GB has been enough for an OS installation (server 2008 enterprise x86), all of my applications, 6GB of music, and 12GB of client files with 20GB left over.   my less-often used files reside on an external 160GB USB HDD.   sure, it's a slight compromise but one that's very easy to do.

once 128 or 256GB SSDs are available then i'll upgrade the X300 and use the 64GB with the 2.5" adapter for my X61 or some other SATA-based thinkpad.

anyway, that's my take on it.   obviously everyone else's opinions/experiences will differ.

[JaneL]

HDD size needs are such an individual thing, though. This X300 is not my work machine, but if it were, 64GB would be more than the 40GB my work HP has. And I still have 16GB left on that one.

[shfawaz]

i doubt the SSD is hurting X300 sales. in fact, i doubt its sales are hurting at all given the small market and low production numbers. the X300 is a niche product much like the macbook air. it's expensive and doesn't fit everyone's needs, just like an exotic sportscar. if you need a minivan then don't buy a corvette since it's twice as expensive and fits 1/4 the amount of passengers. simple.

with that said, had the X300 been designed to use standard 2.5" SATA HDDs then i probably would have skipped the SSD. by being "forced" into buying an SSD, my eyes were opened up to a new technology that i might not have experience for a few more years. i have no regrets with the SSD. it's fast, it's silent, and it runs cool. it has made my overall X300 experience the best thinkpad experience i've had in 13+ years.

for my use 64GB has been enough for an OS installation (server 2008 enterprise x86), all of my applications, 6GB of music, and 12GB of client files with 20GB left over. my less-often used files reside on an external 160GB USB HDD. sure, it's a slight compromise but one that's very easy to do.

once 128 or 256GB SSDs are available then i'll upgrade the X300 and use the 64GB with the 2.5" adapter for my X61 or some other SATA-based thinkpad.

anyway, that's my take on it. obviously everyone else's opinions/experiences will differ.

I just can't fathom any company not welcoming as many sales as physically possible to manufacture. Demand creates sales, and sales drive manufacturing. If Lenovo had the sales, I can't imagine them not ramping up production to accommodate the demand. I think Lenovo learned the lesson of trying to offer a niche product with the X60 series Reserve Edition Thinkpad. You can find those available today at over 50% off the original asking price today at TigerDirect. Granted it was just an X60 with a fancy leather suit and some value added concierge service, I don't see Lenovo heading down that path again anytime soon. People do sometimes buy exotic cars as a status symbols and maybe even for the attention they bring in certain instances. On the other hand, most mainstream laptop buyers choose a laptop to fill a void in their computing needs.

That being said, I have to respectfully disagree that the SSD is not hurting X300 sales. The premium that the SSD adds to the cost of the X300 places it out of the reach of many who would otherwise consider it as a viable ultraportable option when compared to other offerings available today. I agree, this is somewhat a niche product for the time being and they may well want this to be that way for a short while to recoup R&D, but ultimately what Lenovo wants (as does any for profit corporation) is to generate sales that increase profits.

Fact is, ultraportables are making great headway in the marketplace, and more manufacturers are throwing their hat in that same ring (Dell, Asus, and others). The ultraportable market was largely ignored over the years by all but Sony, IBM/Lenovo, Toshiba and maybe a couple others who have since given up on this category of laptops. Something is driving the likes of Dell into this line of notebooks as more and more users demand smaller, lightweight, and more versatile notebooks that can be used and carried more easily that the desktop replacement or even mainstream 5lb. laptop.

I agree that the X300, like the Macbook Air isn't for everyone, and probably not the best option for most, especially as a primary machine. But I think Apple had the right idea in giving users a choice, more like an option to own a revolution in laptop technology at a lower price-point, something Lenovo didn't do, thereby shutting out a potential market of buyers who might have considered the X300 at a price point that is about $1k less.

Moreover, I'm not at all against a smaller HDD even though the larger capacity is my preference (I still have X41's with painfully slow 60Gb 4200RPM 1.8" drives running around here), and the X300 64Gb drive does not deter me from using an X300, however I prefer my 320Gb X61s since it allows me to take my entire music library and some full length movies/TV shows with me anywhere I go without having to lug around an external drive. That my friends as they say in Mastercard land is Priceless!

[erik]

if lenovo flooded the market with X300s then it would lose its popularity.   then, instead of lenovo making money on X300s they would be sitting on them because they aren't "cool" anymore.   personal image speaks volumes when it comes to cutting-edge gear and frankly i'm glad that the X300 is rare.   in fact, if everyone had one then i might not—although i must say that i have very little to complain about in its design and utility for my specific needs.   like nonny said above, 64GB is perfectly livable for many people—business users especially.

so, i have to disagree with you on this one.   keeping production low is an intelligent move on lenovo's part and i'd do the exact same if i were in charge of marketing.

[shfawaz]

if lenovo flooded the market with X300s then it would lose its popularity.   then, instead of lenovo making money on X300s they would be sitting on them because they aren't "cool" anymore.   personal image speaks volumes when it comes to cutting-edge gear and frankly i'm glad that the X300 is rare.   in fact, if everyone had one then i might not—although i must say that i have very little to complain about in its design and utility for my specific needs.   like nonny said above, 64GB is perfectly livable for many people—business users especially.

so, i have to disagree with you on this one.   keeping production low is an intelligent move on lenovo's part and i'd do the exact same if i were in charge of marketing.

I'm not talking about Lenovo "Flooding" the marketplace. If Lenovo has the demand, (and trust me, demand for any product is good for any product any company makes) you can bet your bottom dollar they will do everything they can to ramp up production to meet that demand. No doubt about it.

Isn't it contradictory to say that something wouldn't be popular if more people had or could buy them? And whats cool about something you can't buy or own at any cost? I doubt that Lenovo spent millions of dollars on R&D to simply achieve a "Cool" factor or an illusion that this laptop is a rare gem, and nothing else. Yes, I agree they wanted to create a unique niche and cool product consumers would demand, but to make availability "rare" in the computer business is something we already have. It's called vaporware and it exists throughout the industry. To say one of the reasons you bought this is because it was rare doesn't jive with the other more important reasons you cite for owning this marvel of an ultraportable. More than likely you probably would have bought the X300 on its merits alone rare or otherwise.

With the number of competitors in the laptop business, what you don't eat for lunch, your competition will eat for breakfast. Bottom line, you take what you can get when you can get it. In the ever changing and fast paced world of products that become obsolete sooner than they hit the marketplace, keeping production low for any tech product is economic suicide, especially for a product with a $3k price tag.

[erik]

keep in mind is that the X300's market demand is low.   take a look at the shipping thread sticky at the top of this forum.   it was started three months ago and is still only two pages long.   the T6 and X6 forums have shipping stickies which have exploded in popularity in comparison.   like i said before, it only comprises 5% of overall thinkpad demand and production.   5% isn't much.

many major retailers including CDW, buy.com, newegg, and amazon all have the X300 in stock as of this post.   i hardly find it as being that difficult to obtain.

[royhuang]

1. I went to DataVision in NYC and picked one up a 1TU (haggled $100 off in store) for $2800 2 months ago.

2. The X300 _needs_ the SDD: the processor is relatively slow and the SSD is the factor that makes the laptop much better in terms of overall performance. i remember researching the X300 and unfortunately I forgot the site that posted the speed tests. With a platter HD, the machine would crawl due to the slower 4500 or even 5400 small form factor HDs (I have a 5400-rpm 1.8" ZIF-connection HD in my Motion Computing LE1700 1.2gig Core2Duo) and am thinking of upgrading to it to a SSD since the X300 as speedy in terms of practical usage!

[shfawaz]

2. The X300 _needs_ the SDD: the processor is relatively slow and the SSD is the factor that makes the laptop much better in terms of overall performance. i remember researching the X300 and unfortunately I forgot the site that posted the speed tests. With a platter HD, the machine would crawl due to the slower 4500 or even 5400 small form factor HDs (I have a 5400-rpm 1.8" ZIF-connection HD in my Motion Computing LE1700 1.2gig Core2Duo) and am thinking of upgrading to it to a SSD since the X300 as speedy in terms of practical usage!

I have both the X300 and Macbook Air (MBA). Although the X300 has a slower processor than the MBA, I don't find the 4200RPM HDD in the MBA to be that slow or to weigh (down) heavily on the overall performance of the MBA. But of course there are other factors that come into consideration in when evaluating overall performance.

No doubt that an SSD equipped notebook vs. an HDD is preferable, but the question is, and still remains, is it worth a $1,000 premium? Thats the $64,000 question being asked each time someone considers buying an X300, or ends up buying an MBA where they have a choice.

[akao]

I think comparing X300 to MBA is only fair if both are running Vista (or XP). I have a suspicion that OS X is better with slower hardware, though I have never owned a Mac myself.

With the choice of drives, it also seems odd why Lenovo choose to use a SATA interface rather than a PATA interface. The spec sheets for the Samsung drives shows that the PATA interface uses less power, with comparable performance. <shrug>

Overall, I'm amazed how speedy the X300 is. I do think the SSD contributes a lot, since I have a comparable ultra portable laptop (by HP), which is snail slow with it's low processor speed and hard drive.

[Mr-Pacman]

in my opinion, buying one with a 120GB HDD would be like buying a 997 GT2 without the turbo.

So....a GT3 RS

[erik]

in my opinion, buying one with a 120GB HDD would be like buying a 997 GT2 without the turbo.

So....a GT3 RS

haha... not exactly